libcdio-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Libcdio-devel] [PATCH] Fix gcc warnings


From: Pete Batard
Subject: Re: [Libcdio-devel] [PATCH] Fix gcc warnings
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 19:58:26 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.0

Actually I don't mind if you guys sort it out as last time I checked (a couple years ago), I had lost my ssh access right (which means that right now I'm just using https to clone the repo) and I'm a bit busy with other stuff ATM.

I'm actually quite happy to see that Thomas has take upon himself to create branches and carry additional testing to prepare for merging, so thanks for doing that.

Regards,

/Pete

On 2023.03.23 19:54, Rocky Bernstein wrote:


On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 3:12 PM Thomas Schmitt <scdbackup@gmx.net <mailto:scdbackup@gmx.net>> wrote:

    Hi,

    the patch applies and compiles without complaints.

    I was riddling about the exact meaning of "{ 0 }" when the struct
    has more
    than one member. In Linux time.h struct tm is declared with 11 members.
    Finally i found in C11 specs (ISO/IEC 9899:2011 6.7.9 21):
       If there are fewer initializers in a brace-enclosed list than there
       are elements or members of an aggregate, [...] the remainder of the
       aggregate shall be initialized implicitly the same as objects
    that have
       static storage duration.
    And as we know from Kermighan & Ritchie, static variables are
    automatically initialized to zero.

    I lack of any test ideas for a mere initialization.

    So i pushed the branch "pete_batard_gcc_warnings".
    It is based on "master", not on the pending "pete_batard_ce_v3".

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rocky:
    I never merged anything in git. If you expect me to merge on my own,
    then
    please tell me the exact command which you would use for merging in
    "pete_batard_gcc_warnings" and "pete_batard_ce_v3".
    Actually i would prefer to have you as final doorman at "master".


    Have a nice day :)

    Thomas


I was thinking that Pete would do the merge since he also has commit rights after the two of you  decide that it is time to merge

Pete knows which branch and so is the right one and so on. Of course,  I am happy to help in whatever way I can or that makes sense.






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]